TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (1) TMI 477
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....244A from 1st April itself, when the amount of refund became due for the first time because of the order of the appellate authority and was delayed for the reasons attributable to the assessee?" 2. Brief facts are as under:- Respondent - assessee had filed return of income for the assessment year 2001-02. During the course of the assessment, the assessee argued before the assessing officer that a portion of interest income which the assessee had in the return offered to tax, on the basis of accrual had not become due and that therefore, such interest income should not be taxed for the year under consideration. A note to this effect was inserted to the return of income. The assessing officer, however, did not accept the stand of the as....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Principal Commissioner or] Commissioner whose decision thereon shall be final." As per sub-section (2) of Section 244A, if the proceedings resulting in refund are delayed for the reasons attributable to the assessee, whether wholly or in part, the period of delay so attributable shall be excluded from the period for which the interest is payable. 4. In the present case, the assessing officer was wholly incorrect in invoking sub-section (2) of Section 244A of the Act, since we do not find any reasons attributable to the assessee which delayed his refund claim. During the assessment proceedings itself, relying on the note to the return filed, the assessee had argued that certain interest income had not accrued and therefore, not chargea....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Court in the case of CIT Vs. South Indian Bank Ltd., reported in (2012) 340 ITR 574 (Ker) in which the assessee had raised a belated claim for deduction which was allowed by the Commissioner (Appeals). The Revenue, therefore, contended that for such delay, interest should be declined under Section 244A of the Act. In the said case also, the assessee had not made any claim for deduction of provision of bad debts in the original return. But before completion of the assessment, the assessee had made such a claim which was rejected by the Assessing Officer. The Commissioner allowed the claim and remanded the matter to the Assessing Officer. Pursuant to which, the assessee became entitled to refund. Revenue argued that the assessee would not be....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... interest to the assessee in terms of section 244A(1) (a) of the Act." 6. This Court in the case of Chetan N. Shah Vs. M.K. Moghe, Commissioner of Income-tax 1, Mumbai [2015] 53 taxmann.com 18 (Bombay), also had occasion to interpret sub-section (2) of Section 244A. The facts were that in revision proceedings, the assessee took a stand that in the return, there was an erroneous declaration of an amount of income chargeable to the tax. The Commissioner accepted the assessee's contention. Even in such a situation, the Court held that sub-section (2) of Section 244A would have no applicability. Following observations were made:- "13. The Assessing Officer has been given no discretion in the matter of granting interest. The amount of ....